Posted on 04/12/2006 8:14:42 PM PDT by callmejoe
Al-Qaida Figure Backs Iraqi Insurgents
Top al-Qaida Figure Ayman Al-Zawahri Urges Support for Iraqi Insurgents in Video
The Associated Press (snipped)
CAIRO, Egypt - No. 2 al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahri praised insurgents in Iraq, particularly Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and called on all Muslims to support them in a video posted Thursday on the Internet.
The video was dated with an Islamic month corresponding to November 2005 and al-Zawahri mentions an Oct. 23 earthquake that hit Pakistan and Afghanistan. But it appeared to be the first time the 28-minute video has been made public.
It was not clear why the video was not released soon after the date it was allegedly filmed. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
"How does one conduct a war against a religious fanatic culture? It certainly cannot be done on a battle field. Targeted assasinations? It is a metastasizing beast."
War must be met with war (as after 9/11) realizing that (as U.S. military leaders have said over and over) victory cannot be achieved solely through military means. When our own military says that the war cannot be won by military might alone, it should be noted carefully and soberly.
The terrorists are hijacking the Islamic world by forcing us to come after them (and kill innocents in the process). They want us to "take down the planes" ourselves. If it comes to that, then it will come to that. But then the war will last not decades, but generations, and it will be a war not of attrition, but of near-extinction. We will win in the end. But the survivors will envy the dead. Within a matter of years, a decade at the very most, nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare will become a fact of life. And as the war progresses, the use of these weapons will escalate. Unlike the Cold War, the terrorists cannot be deterred by mutually assured destruction. They embrace mass martyrdom.
It would be far better for the entire human race to help "the passengers" take back "the hijacked plane". In a way, we owe it to them. Among the only people who assembled in a spontaneous candlelight vigil after 9/11 were Iranians in Tehran. I wish some of the people who gleefully talk about turning Iran into a parking lot would remember that. Iranians (who are almost all Muslims) are just about the most pro-American people on the planet. In fact, you can probably count the number of countries with such a pro-American people on two hands with some fingers left over.
The trick to winning is to help the passengers take back the planes, not to shoot them out of the sky by writing them all off as "the enemy". Otherwise, the planes will keep coming until one we miss takes down a city instead of a building. And then this will become a very dark and miserable planet where the ideology of mass martyrdom married to weapons of mass destruction sets mass extinction (global suicide) as its war aim. We should follow their "reasoning" (such as it is) to its logical conclusion.
People on either side who would welcome a "clash of civilizations" (whimsically defining the enemy to be over a billion people) are either ignorant (mentally deficient) or genocidal (morally deficient) or both.
Civilizational war is only inevitable when people start to believe it is so. And too many here are already peddling that suicidal delusion.
"You're exactly right, Joe."
Wouldn't have picked up on the Sykes-Picot/Percy Cox reference if you hadn't pointed it out earlier in this thread.
Thanks.
"Unprecedented to have all 3 of them Zawahiri, Usama and Zarqawi to release statements so close together."
Add all three came (roughly) 90 days after the truce offer of 1/19 (the "9/11 in reverse").
(Remembering that the similar 2004 truce offer to Europe originally had a 90 day deadline . . .)
62 inches of snow?
Wowsers.
>>>They are preparing the way for the "army of the Mahdi" marching from Khorasan (eastern Iran/western Afghanistan). The "black flags from the east" are coming. . .
Yes, indeed. Coming from the east.
They need Jerusalem, Rome and a "Manhattan project" to accomplish their goal.
I agree.
It's easy to talk tough from behind a keyboard.
I do wonder why an internal resistance to Ahmagonnadojihad hasn't taken place yet? I hope we don't go to war with Iran, but that the Iranians can take their fate into their own hands.
Soon.
You're welcome.
Teamwork it is. ;-)
>>>(Remembering that the similar 2004 truce offer to Europe originally had a 90 day deadline . . .)
Right, but the truce offer came after the Madrid 3/11 bombings.
Then not quite 4 months after Madrid, were the London bombings.
Yep. Not a typo.
It's been a rather exciting week.........even without power and, "shudder", a computer. I really thought I would need a twelve step program until today. Thankfully, I had chardonnay and lots of books. Almost started smoking again.
Callmejoe has really had some interesting posts here. Scary, but very informative.
I do love a big snowstorm, but that's a whopper!
Glad you're back up.
Joe's posts are frightening and very insightful.
"Right, but the truce offer came after the Madrid 3/11 bombings."
It gets confusing because I think there was a 90-day deadline in 2004 and then it repeated in 2005, but I'm not sure on that. It also wasn't widely reported because I think it was issued by the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigade and there was doubt whether there was such a group and I think much of what they put out previously had been bogus. It would be interesting to get the dates on the 2004 and 2005 Europe 90-day deadlines and if the 7/7/05 London hit tracked with that or not.
Zarqawi hasn't allowed his face to be filmed in a decade. I see it as in "in your face" gesture, (so when we are hit, we remember his face). He seems to be acting like a common criminal (with access to some nasty weapons) - - an egotistical street thug who doesn't like others getting the "credit" he believes should be his. He is trying to stake his claim on what is about to happen.
"I do wonder why an internal resistance to Ahmagonnadojihad hasn't taken place yet?"
Regime did an artful job of framing the issue over the past few years. Even the most reformist, pro-Western Iranians have been convinced that "peaceful nuclear power" is an issue of patriotism and a sovereign right that cannot be surrendered. They have been told that if the Pakistanis next door can have them (and they played footsie with al Qaeda - - not nice folks) and the Israelis can have a couple hundred, why pick on poor Iran for just wanting a little electricity? They have also heard the "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" chants so long that their president's rhetoric goes in one ear and out the other. I don't think they take him seriously like the rest of the world does. But he is deadly serious.
German military prior to WWII thought Hitler was a nutty little nitwit they could use to further their own rearmament agenda. They figured out too late who was being manipulated, who was being serious, and who was not. Some tried to stop him, but Hitler already had several years to consolidate power and they could never overcome that to achieve a "critical mass" to overthrow the regime (but came close in July 1944).
Iranian military is probably making the same mistake. They are failing to understand how this man and the new faction that is taking control is about to lead Iran to the same destruction Hitler brought Germany (or even a far worse fate). In private, they probably see Ahmad-e-nejad as a nutty little nitwit. Bad mistake. It took D-Day for the German High Command to understand what was about to happen to Germany. And by that time it was far too late.
I hope the Iranians understand that the American retired generals hyperventilating on TV about our civilian leadership are probably motivated more about what might happen three months from now than what happened three years ago. The son is not his father. This one is not bluffing about using nukes (like Bush 41 did before the Gulf War).
I'm guessing that the light bulb came on a few weeks ago in the Pentagon that the idea of the U.S. preempting with tactical nuclear weapons was actually being taken seriously by the civilian leadership and wasn't some elaborate bluff (Arkin's blog "Early Warning" on the Washington Post website has been talking about this for weeks). That's probably when the calls went out to their retired general buddies to sound the alarm that somebody is off their nut talking about initiating a nuclear war. So rather than cast the situation as a bad remake of Dr. Strangelove, I guess they trotted out all the old arguments about how such a hash of things were made three years ago and someone needs to go. I doubt all the hub-bub is really about Iraq.
I think Rummy and Cheney (who was ready as SecDef to nuke Iraq the first time - - footnoted in horror by Powell in his 1995 biography - - and was on CBS' 60 Minutes a few weeks after 9/11 talking about nuking Afghanistan) have some folks at the Pentagon freaked out. If this scenario is true (and its just a guess based on connecting the dots), I think it is an overreaction. Bush plays everything close to the vest. Only he (and maybe Cheney) would really know how seriously they take that option. But by burying things so deep and hardening them up, the Iranians are basically daring Bush to use nukes as that is really the only way to dig those facilities out in a way they cannot be used again.
I wish the Iranian military leaders would get half as freaked out about the truly insane and deadly serious things their maniacal civilian leadership are actually saying and the suicidal activities they are actually pursuing as our generals seem to be about things that happened three years ago and things that may or may not be considered for the future.
....."trying to stake his claim".....
I agree. He is tired of seeing others get the glory he feels should be rightfully his. He is trying to put his imprimatur on what he thinks is about to happen.......or is about to cause to happen. Decapitating Daniel Pearl didn't quite do it for him. His quest for fame is still thirsting.
"Some of the missiles have already arrived in Iran, Yadlin said in a lecture in memory of Israel's sixth president Haim Herzog, who was also head of the IDF Intelligence Branch. . . With this purchase the Iranians have leap-frogged over their Shihab-4 missile with its range of 2,000 kilometers. . . The Iranians are known to be at the early stages of developing two more long-range missiles. However American intelligence sources say Iran is at an advanced stage of developing a missile that can carry a nuclear warhead.
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/709888.html
Last update - 02:51 27/04/2006
Iran procures missiles capable of hitting Europe
By Ze'ev Schiff, Haaretz Correspondent
Iran has purchased ground-to-ground missiles from North Korea with a range of 2,500 kilometers, the head of the Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Branch, Major General Amos Yadlin, said Wednesday.
While Iran already possessed missiles capable of reaching Israel, the new weapons pose a threat for countries in Europe and parts of the Middle East that have now come into Iranian range.
Some of the missiles have already arrived in Iran, Yadlin said in a lecture in memory of Israel's sixth president Haim Herzog, who was also head of the IDF Intelligence Branch.
The missiles are known in the West as BM-25s, operate on liquid fuel and are single-stage. The BM-25 was originally manufactured in the Soviet Union, where the first generation, adapted for use by Soviet submarines and able to carry a nuclear warhead, was known as the SSN6. After the Russians retired the missiles from service, they sold them to the North Koreans, who developed them to carry a heavier payload.
With this purchase the Iranians have leap-frogged over their Shihab-4 missile with its range of 2,000 kilometers.
Iran worked for years on the development of the Shihab-3, which has a range of 1,300 kilometers, and conducted numerous tests. They also developed a cone with improved ability to enter the atmosphere, which meant it was more accurate.
The fact that the Shihab-3, when fired from certain areas of Iran, could hit Israel, spurred Israel on in its development of the Arrow missile, which can intercept the Shihab-3.
The Iranians are known to be at the early stages of developing two more long-range missiles. However American intelligence sources say Iran is at an advanced stage of developing a missile that can carry a nuclear warhead.
The United States has informed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the details of the Iranian missile program.
North Korea has longer range missiles that have been tested a number of times outside its borders. In one case a missile flew over Japanese airspace during a test.
That's what I wish as well.
Thanks, as always, for your analysis.
You inspire me to dig deeper into history to try to predict the future.
>>>Iran has purchased ground-to-ground missiles from North Korea with a range of 2,500 kilometers.
Something new every day.
Now I need to look at a map and see who's within the new range.
BTW, I'm sure you'd be interested in FReeper DoctorZin's blog. Best Iran info all on one page:
http://regimechangeiran.blogspot.com/
Let's hope for a major case of stage fright!
"Now I need to look at a map and see who's within the new range."
If North Korea were to successfully transfer an ICBM (this was an IRBM), the east coast would be in range based on the capabilities of the TD-2 tested in 1998. The theoretical ranges of the (untested) TD-3 cover all of the continental United States.
As I understand it, the Shihab-5 is a knockoff of the TD2.
This was written in 2000 and quoted a public 1999 NIE.
http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/meria/journal/2000/issue3/jv4n3a5.html
" . . . Iran's efforts to develop a region-wide missile capability took a big step forward with the 1998 test launch of the Shahab-3. The United States believes that Russian technology has played a critical part in the development of the Shahab-3, though the missile itself is based on the North Korean No Dong. (36) In late 1999, a senior U.S. defense official reported that Iran was experiencing problems with the missile and had several unsuccessful tests. (37) However, in early 2000, the Iranians conducted another successful test launch of a Shahab-3, using one of a dozen North Korean rocket motors supplied to Tehran in early 1999. (38)
Iran is also believed to be working on more advanced systems. The Shahab-4 appears to be an intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM) with a range of 2,000 kilometers. In contrast, it appears that the Shahab-5 will be a 10,000-kilometer range intercontinental range missile (ICBM). (39)
Significantly, the U.S. intelligence community is no longer confident about how long it will take Iran to develop an ICBM.
"If Iran follows a development time line similar to that demonstrated with the Shahab-3, which included significant foreign assistance, it would take Iran many years to develop a 9,000 to 10,000 km range ICBM capable of reaching the United States. But Iran could significantly shorten the acquisition time-and warning time-by purchasing key components or entire systems from potential sellers such as North Korea." (40)
The U.S. intelligence community's evolving views on Iran's chance of acquiring ICBMs are reflected in the unclassified version of a National Intelligence Estimate released in September 1999. According to the testimony of the National Intelligence Officer responsible for the report, North Korea is the most likely country to acquire an ICBM. He added that, "Iran is the next hostile country most capable of testing an ICBM capable of delivering a weapon to the United States during the next 15 years." Other assessments of Iranian missile capabilities include the following:
--Iran could test an ICBM that could deliver a several-hundred kilogram payload to many parts of the United States in the latter half of the next decade (2005-2009), using Russian technology and assistance.
--Iran could pursue a Taepo Dong-type ICBM and could test a Taepo Dong-1 or Taepo Dong-2-type ICBM, possibly with North Korean assistance, in the next few years.
--Iran is likely to test a space launch vehicle (SLV) by 2010 that-once developed-could be converted into an ICBM capable of delivering a several-hundred kilogram payload to the United States.
Beyond that, analysts differ on the likely timing of Iran's first flight test of an ICBM that could threaten the United States. Assessments include:
--likely before 2010 and very likely before 2015 (noting that an SLV with ICBM capabilities will probably be tested within the next few years);
--no more than an even chance by 2010 and a better than even chance by 2015;
--and less than an even chance by 2015. (41)
Given the available information, it is probably prudent to assume that Iran will possess a missile capable of striking U.S. cities by 2010."
BTW, I'm sure you'd be interested in FReeper DoctorZin's blog. Best Iran info all on one page:
http://regimechangeiran.blogspot.com/
Definitely. Started reading it a year or so ago.
"Let's hope for a major case of stage fright!"
If only excessive perspiration would cause a short circuit in his suicide vest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.